lol wut! Kids have to stay in school until they're 18?

Banned 42
Found 7th Mar 2009
or is my little sister chattin nuts and bolts... she is 11 btw so it woldnt surprise me.

  1. Misc
  2. School
Groups
  1. Misc
  2. School
42 Comments

i heard 17

I stayed in school til I was 18 and went on to uni - Scare her and tell her she'll be in education until she's 23

it would be a good idea..then instead of saying 'kids have to stay in school till there 18' u would have typed correctly 'kids have to stay in school till they're 18'

hehe....im messing with u DG!but seriously i think its a good idea....

There 18???? LOL. Looks like you need a bit more schooling!!!!

BTW: They are.

That would be a bad thing?

School or National Service.

Banned

I believe it's 18 in 2013 so yeah when she comes to leave school she'll have to be 18

"This will not mean that pupils have to stay in the classroom or continue with academic lessons - but they will have to continue to receive training. "
news.bbc.co.uk/1/h…stm

Original Poster Banned

magicbeans;4573546

it would be a good idea..then instead of saying 'kids have to stay in … it would be a good idea..then instead of saying 'kids have to stay in school till there 18' u would have typed correctly 'kids have to stay in school till they're 18'hehe....im messing with u DG!but seriously i think its a good idea....



lol what you talking about :roll:

Welcome to 2007.

Yes that's right, it all depends on how old they are now ie my 13yr old nephew only has to stay until 17 but they've raised it again to 18 for 11's and under (age could be wrong). They don't actually have to stay at school though, as long as they are getting training/schooling of some kind or if they get a job at 16 they can leave. I was miffed at first hearing that my 2 daughters would HAVE to stay at school without option until they were 18, but when you read into it a bit it does actually make sense. I think it's to stop wasters leaving school at 16 and then dossing about not doing anything (they have to wait 2 more years to do that - lol).

Original Poster Banned

t0mm;4573573

Welcome to 2007.



yeh i see the date on that bbc article... first ive heard mind

Original Poster Banned

Annie1508;4573580

Yes that's right, it all depends on how old they are now ie my 13yr old … Yes that's right, it all depends on how old they are now ie my 13yr old nephew only has to stay until 17 but they've raised it again to 18 for 11's and under (age could be wrong). They don't actually have to stay at school though, as long as they are getting training/schooling of some kind or if they get a job at 16 they can leave. I was miffed at first hearing that my 2 daughters would HAVE to stay at school without option until they were 18, but when you read into it a bit it does actually make sense. I think it's to stop wasters leaving school at 16 and then dossing about not doing anything (they have to wait 2 more years to do that - lol).



Yeh i suppose it does make sense. i mean they cant sign on until there 18 and they arent guarnteed to have a job when they leave school at 16

Banned

magicbeans;4573546

it would be a good idea..then instead of saying 'kids have to stay in … it would be a good idea..then instead of saying 'kids have to stay in school till there 18' u would have typed correctly 'kids have to stay in school till they're 18'hehe....im messing with u DG!but seriously i think its a good idea....




and also the smart ***** would know its not "till" its actually "until"

Original Poster Banned

crispwarez;4573659

and also the smart ***** would know its not "till" its actually "until"



umm dude i had until wrote? MB was the one who wrote till lol :-P

Proper vocational training I hope; other-wise, it's a bit stupid.

DangerGod;4573684

umm dude i had until wrote? MB was the one who wrote till lol :-P



now thats embarrasing [SIZE="7"]SHAMED [/SIZE]

id have a row of smileys 'oops' but ill prob get 5 crosses....but u know what im trying to say

I thought it was the children that started in reception class this year that will be remaining in education until they are 18. Other years aren't affected from what i understood of it

Surely they have to let them come home before then ?

Banned

this is a good thing!

chesso;4573820

Proper vocational training I hope; other-wise, it's a bit stupid.


I would think proper vocational training is one of the main reasons for raising the age to 18 as many of those leaving at 16 are the ones that would benefit from such a system.

It is rather amusing that the person starting this topic has such poor spelling and grammar which I guess gives some support for raising the leaving age.

John

Banned

Johnmcl7;4574330

I would think proper vocational training is one of the main reasons for … I would think proper vocational training is one of the main reasons for raising the age to 18 as many of those leaving at 16 are the ones that would benefit from such a system.



Yeh I agree, though also think one of the main reason behind it is to massage unemploment figures. Or are 16 to 18 YO already excluded? (Wouldn't surprise me!)

It is rather amusing that the person starting this topic has such poor … It is rather amusing that the person starting this topic has such poor spelling and grammar which I guess gives some support for raising the leaving age.



Ouch!

Johnmcl7;4574330

I would think proper vocational training is one of the main reasons for … I would think proper vocational training is one of the main reasons for raising the age to 18 as many of those leaving at 16 are the ones that would benefit from such a system. It is rather amusing that the person starting this topic has such poor spelling and grammar which I guess gives some support for raising the leaving age.John



LOL @ Jobs

Original Poster Banned

Johnmcl7;4574330

I would think proper vocational training is one of the main reasons for … I would think proper vocational training is one of the main reasons for raising the age to 18 as many of those leaving at 16 are the ones that would benefit from such a system. It is rather amusing that the person starting this topic has such poor spelling and grammar which I guess gives some support for raising the leaving age.



EDIT: i dont want an infraction so ill remove that

DangerGod;4574405

lol ok man im sorry im not as high class as you


You should surely appreciate the benefits of an extended education then.

John

Original Poster Banned

Johnmcl7;4574462

You should surely appreciate the benefits of an extended education then, … You should surely appreciate the benefits of an extended education then, I didn't leave full time education until I was 22.John



http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff19/aza666/cookie.gif

i have a 11yr old ,, year 7 at high school , i also have 2 boys 12 yr and 13yr, year 8 and yr 9 ,,, well all children in year 7 and below will have to stay in FT education until 17yrs old , all other children year 8 and above can leave at age 16 ,, so my 2 boys can leave if they wish at 16 and daughter cant until 17 ,, i hope this helps

Original Poster Banned

nikkit72;4574589

i have a 11yr old ,, year 7 at high school , i also have 2 boys 12 yr and … i have a 11yr old ,, year 7 at high school , i also have 2 boys 12 yr and 13yr, year 8 and yr 9 ,,, well all children in year 7 and below will have to stay in FT education until 17yrs old , all other children year 8 and above can leave at age 16 ,, so my 2 boys can leave if they wish at 16 and daughter cant until 17 ,, i hope this helps



hey did you get that avatar from here? or just coinsidence? lol

hotukdeals.com/ite…e=2

government attempt to modify the unemployment totals.

DangerGod;4574595

hey did you get that avatar from here? or just coinsidence? … hey did you get that avatar from here? or just coinsidence? lolhttp://hotukdeals.com/item/353299/showthread.php?t=353299&page=2



yup ,, liked it so pinched it :P , havent found a good one but to be honest forgot to look for one for a while then saw this :P added rep for ya :P

ClarityofMind;4575065

government attempt to modify the unemployment totals.



Doubtful, bear in mind the news is now over two years old which is far before any of the unemployment issues we currently have. I'm sure around that time they were also announcing changes on the vocational training system by attempting to make qualifications gained equivalent to academic qualifications therefore encouraging more people to take this route. I do think it's a flaw in the education system that there's too much of a push towards academic qualifications which for many people are simply not that useful and I think they're right in putting more effort in vocational training systems which will benefit some pupils far more than academic work.

John

Johnmcl7;4577603

Doubtful, bear in mind the news is now over two years old which is far … Doubtful, bear in mind the news is now over two years old which is far before any of the unemployment issues we currently have. I'm sure around that time they were also announcing changes on the vocational training system by attempting to make qualifications gained equivalent to academic qualifications therefore encouraging more people to take this route. I do think it's a flaw in the education system that there's too much of a push towards academic qualifications which for many people are simply not that useful and I think they're right in putting more effort in vocational training systems which will benefit some pupils far more than academic work.John



It's to stop payouts of JSA at 16 and other benefits nothing to do with further education.

Banned

dontasciime;4577915

None of the above. It's to stop payouts of JSA at 16 and other benefits … None of the above. It's to stop payouts of JSA at 16 and other benefits nothing to do with further education.



Rules for 16-17yr olds are very strict
"JSA for 16 and 17 year olds

If you're unemployed and 16 or 17 years old you may be able to get income-based JSA for a short amount of time. For example, this could be if you:

* are forced to live away from your parents
* will find it very hard to live without Jobseeker’s Allowance
* are part of a couple responsible for a child"

Original Poster Banned

nikkit72;4575421

yup ,, liked it so pinched it :P , havent found a good one but to be … yup ,, liked it so pinched it :P , havent found a good one but to be honest forgot to look for one for a while then saw this :P added rep for ya :P



haha its ok, just wandered :-D

dontasciime;4577915

It's to stop payouts of JSA at 16 and other benefits nothing to do with … It's to stop payouts of JSA at 16 and other benefits nothing to do with further education.


It would be rather pointless if that was the case as any training system costs money and those who stay on at school between 16-18 can apply for an Education Maintenance Allowance.

John

Johnmcl7;4579350

It would be rather pointless if that was the case as any training system … It would be rather pointless if that was the case as any training system costs money and those who stay on at school between 16-18 can apply for an Education Maintenance Allowance.John



£10-30 week depending on how much M and D get paid. My daughter got £10 a week EMA and bus fares to send her to school were £15 and dinner money per week was at least £10.

I'm not really sure what you're saying here as that proves my point that it isn't free for the government to keep teenagers at school nor signficantly cheaper despite your implication above. The upper value of EMA is actually more than I received when I was on jobseeker's allowance (110 per month) and that was while living on my own and paying 250 pounds per month for the flat.

John

it just keeps off the streets vamdalising and drinking and taking drugs all day

Johnmcl7;4579774

I'm not really sure what you're saying here as that proves my point that … I'm not really sure what you're saying here as that proves my point that it isn't free for the government to keep teenagers at school nor signficantly cheaper despite your implication above. The upper value of EMA is actually more than I received when I was on jobseeker's allowance (110 per month) and that was while living on my own and paying 250 pounds per month for the flat.John



I see English was your strong point and not maths £10 is cheaper than paying 16-17-18 yr old any other benefit they qualify for, for however many weeks and CT and HB per week when they give birth or £1,000 a week @ 1 of HMP.

It is free as you and the many others who stayed on to get EMA are now in such high paids good jobs that you pay lots more TAX to pay for it. So in essence it is free.

No I'm pretty good at maths although it doesn't take university level calculus to work out that £110 is less than £120 which is the point I was making. Also as you believe all education is free you may want to take some lessons in finance or perhaps get a government job as that admittedly seems to be the working assumption these days. As I said from the start (and the part you seem to keep missing), the initiative is likely aimed at vocational training *not* higher education as you seem to believe. Rather obviously those who are aiming at higher education are going to be staying until they're 18 by choice not because they legally have to.

As for receiving EMA, there was no such thing in my day - I stayed at school to get the qualifications needed, then had to pay my way through University with no grants and having to pay tuition fees. Then the brief time I was out of work I didn't even get as much as some pupils will do for staying on at school(!), at this point you must be thinking I'm in one of these 'high paid jobs' but sadly not at all - you don't need to be earning much to be well clear of receiving any money back from the government.

Of course you're entitled to believe what you want as I am although it's not much of a move to reduce unemployment short of extending the minimum age of leaving to school to 40 as the high employment rates are increasing from outwith the 16-18 year old band. It's not much of a money saving move either as it's going to need reasonable investment to bring schools up to the capacity required to cope with the additional numbers. You are right it should bring money back in the long term but the key aspect there is long term, there's no short term gains out of this.

John

DragonChris;4573542

I stayed in school til I was 18 and went on to uni - Scare her and tell … I stayed in school til I was 18 and went on to uni - Scare her and tell her she'll be in education until she's 23



haha, I was 24 before I finished education and I've still got 2 years of training to go.:)

Johnmcl7;4582186

No I'm pretty good at maths although it doesn't take university level … No I'm pretty good at maths although it doesn't take university level calculus to work out that £110 is less than £120 which is the point I was making. Also as you believe all education is free you may want to take some lessons in finance or perhaps get a government job as that admittedly seems to be the working assumption these days. As I said from the start (and the part you seem to keep missing), the initiative is likely aimed at vocational training *not* higher education as you seem to believe. Rather obviously those who are aiming at higher education are going to be staying until they're 18 by choice not because they legally have to.As for receiving EMA, there was no such thing in my day - I stayed at school to get the qualifications needed, then had to pay my way through University with no grants and having to pay tuition fees. Then the brief time I was out of work I didn't even get as much as some pupils will do for staying on at school(!), at this point you must be thinking I'm in one of these 'high paid jobs' but sadly not at all - you don't need to be earning much to be well clear of receiving any money back from the government.Of course you're entitled to believe what you want as I am although it's not much of a move to reduce unemployment short of extending the minimum age of leaving to school to 40 as the high employment rates are increasing from outwith the 16-18 year old band. It's not much of a money saving move either as it's going to need reasonable investment to bring schools up to the capacity required to cope with the additional numbers. You are right it should bring money back in the long term but the key aspect there is long term, there's no short term gains out of this.John




£10 x 4 is £40 mate as I already have said not everyone gets £30 EMA a week (My daughter as already mentioned only used to get £10 per week) (I am unaware as to whether anyone now that it is going to be compulsory to stay on at school will even get this payment anymore)

Education for the mainstream has always been free. How many pupils do you know who would pay to go to school ?


vocational training and I already said LOL @ Jobs

The whole system is messed up and neither you nor me or anyone else no matter how much thought goes into it will be able to fix it not even Bob.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text